Hmm . . . most of the comments seem to be that there should not be a maximum capped. How would people feel if the rule were inverted: should they require each partner on a team to complete a minimum number of Roadblocks (say, three or four) during the course of the race?

Hmm . . . most of the comments seem to be that there should not be a maximum capped. How would people feel if the rule were inverted: should they require each partner on a team to complete a minimum number of Roadblocks (say, three or four) during the course of the race?

I think if one team member does all the RB, fine. If it's easier for them, why should the weaker person be forced to do it? Sort of defeats the purposes of having strengths and weaknesses. I now this probably had to do with Kim/Christie/Nicole, and if that's the only reason they changed it, I hate it even more.

Buffy: What is this?Willow: A doodle. I do doodle. You too. You do doodle, too. ("Gingerbread")

Xander: Damn it! You know what? I'm sick of this crap. I'm sick of being the guy who eats insects and gets the funny syphilis. As of this moment, it's over. I'm finished being everybody's butt monkey! ("Buffy vs. Dracula")

It was one of those things that happened in isolation a few times in the first 4 TARs, but then when ALL 3 of the FINAL 3 Teams in TAR5 had a person that only did 1 RB, that was surely the straw that broke the camel's back.

As far as the argument that some are making that they liked it before where the Teams had to determine who would be better at each RB -- I'd argue that many of them were not *really* doing that analysis.

Many times the RBs are gender-neutral, strength-neutral, etc. I'd say that NOW the Teams actually have to think about each strength/weakness MORE than before.

I'd say it is very likely that more females will do RBs early in the race now. If they encounter one they can do, they'll go for it rather than taking a chance waiting for the unknown RB later.

But, as others have said, I think the change went a tiny bit too far. They've forced the winners to have each person perform 6 RBs.

You can't have the rule stated as minimum, because not all Teams get to the same number of RBs. I would've preferred a rule that didn't allow one member to do more than twice the number of RBs that the other member has done. It would still force Teams to spread the RB love around. For example, it would allow Teams that make it through the 9th leg to have one person that has done as many as 5 (but not 6) of their 8 RBs. A Team that makes it to the end (12 RBs) could have one person that has done as many as 8 RBs.

There are three cigars in the humidor --- My yo-yo has no string --- Isn't that rather misshapen?
It's supposed to bend that way, I'm Italian! --- I bring new meaning to the phrase 'Blown out of proportion'! --- My puzzle has one piece missing

As far as the argument that some are making that they liked it before where the Teams had to determine who would be better at each RB -- I'd argue that many of them were not *really* doing that analysis.

Many times the RBs are gender-neutral, strength-neutral, etc. I'd say that NOW the Teams actually have to think about each strength/weakness MORE than before.

You know, you really need to stop stealing my opinions before I can tell them. :phhht...

Like CGET said, I think that this rule does indeed require the racers to make decisions about the Roadblocks...at least more so than previous seasons. The teams need to decide what Roadblocks should go to who, as bad choices can really end up hurting them if they make it to the later parts of the race.

This Roadblock, for examply, was not physically-based at all. Therefore it was smart to have the less physcially-able people on the teams do it. This will allow the more physical racers to perform the later tasks that might require more physical energy. So, how many times can I use physical in a paragraph? And more importantly, who made the right decision?

Hayden and Aaron: NO...Aaron did the Roadblock...bad choiceKris and Jon: NO...(and they did everything else right, too) Jon did itLena and Kristi: I have no idea...Kristi does it, but was it the right choice?Freddy and Kendra: YES...Kendra does the task, and Freddy can now do future ones that may require himJonathan and Victoria: NO...Jonathan does it, but it's to make him feel manly and supreme...hopefully the canoe race put him back down a notchLori and Bolo: Yet another NO...unless Lori proves to be more physical than Bolo in the long run?Adam and Rebecca: NO...I'm starting to see a patternMerideth and Maria: ???...I'll go with YES, just because they were eliminated, and we'll never know for sureDon and MJ: NO...Don does it, and this was definately a task for his wife; in her defense, she knows she should have done itGus and Hera: YES...maybe good decisions like this will continue to put them at the front of the pack for a while

That's only 2 definate YES's...if the teams keep this up, there's going to be some problems at the later Roadblocks.

I am all for the Roadblock Rule. And yes I perfer to call it the FloZach Rule because she chose him as a partner because he wuld be doing all the hard physical stuff. Also, because it seems from the very beginning when there was a male/female team the males did all the roadblocks and you felt as if why are the women even there except to yell at the guys.

This rule is meant to even the playing field and I am glad that the producers recognized it and did it.

As far as strategy goes, remember you have to chose the person who does the roadblock before you open the envelope and know what it is.

Also many of these tasks aren't life threatening but if you have a fear of heights or claustraphobia there may be a problem. Personally, I will do the zip line, repell off a wall, swim with sharks. But bungee jump. You can have it. Go figure.

I think if one team member does all the RB, fine. If it's easier for them, why should the weaker person be forced to do it? Sort of defeats the purposes of having strengths and weaknesses. I now this probably had to do with Kim/Christie/Nicole, and if that's the only reason they changed it, I hate it even more.

Why even have a team then? I think it plays up the strengths and weaknesses and forces them to think ahead and plan a little more. These people aren't being asked to split an atom.

I've been reading all the pro and con positions and I doubt either side will change the other side's mind.

I'm still against it. I feel that if one partner is great at scheduling flights and/or managing money and/or map reading, etc., etc., and so forth, that person is contributing just as much to the team as the one who does all or most of the roadblocks.

Why even have a team then? I think it plays up the strengths and weaknesses and forces them to think ahead and plan a little more. These people aren't being asked to split an atom.

But as I said, if a RB is one team member's strength, but the one who's weaker at it has to it, what's the point of having strengths and weaknesses? They don't know what RB lay ahead, so the only way they can plan ahead is just have the weaker person do all the RB now and get them out of the way.